Translate

Sunday, May 30, 2010

"Future Pope(Benedict) Refused Defrocking Of Convicted Priest "/Associated Press

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/R/REL_POPE_CHURCH_ABUSE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2010-05-30-14-15-16

Future pope (Benedict) refused defrocking of convicted priest


In his 1989 letter to Ratzinger, Ryan outlined Campbell's many offenses against children and asked for his laicization. He pointed out the local notoriety of the priest's case and said his crimes and those of another abusive priest had already cost the diocese $1.5 million in damages and legal fees.

"I fear the infliction of further pain upon the victims of his criminal activity and their families," Ryan wrote. "I fear that the diocese will suffer further pastorally and in public relations, to say nothing of greater financial damage."

Ratzinger refused, citing Vatican policy, and told the bishop to proceed with a church tribunal."

It boggles the mind that Roman Catholic Womenpriests are excommunicated and refused church funeral, and religious orders of women are being investigated by the Vatican for their feminist spirit and support of women's ordination. Yet, Cardinal Ratiznger, now Pope Benedict, refused to defrock a criminal priest who had inflicted so much damage on children.What is wrong with this picture? Where is justice in the Roman Catholic Church? Bridget Mary Meehan

3 comments:

Mike said...

1) The bishop could have defrocked the priest himself.

2) The tribunal apparently found no need to defrock him. Blame the tribunal, not Card. Ratzinger

3) Why not petition the pope if it was such a serious offense?

You have a serious axe to grind against the pope, lady, and I don't care for it.

Ravensbarque said...

1. The bishop could not have defrocked him. The bishop could have, however, relieved him of his faculties and put him out to pasture.

2. Ratzinger had/has the authority to overrule the tribunal.

3. A petition to the pope would be lucky to get read, let alone get past the first secretary who screens the mail.

NOW, would you please justify the glaring discrepency in the last paragraph of the article? Why are women scrutinized, reprimanded, and swiftly excommunicated for alleged "crimes" that hurt no one while male priests who destroy the lives and souls of children are coddled, kept, and never excommunicated? Yes, a few -- VERY few -- have been defrocked. But, defrocking does not mean excommunication. Defrocked priests are generally in good standing with the church.

I really would like to know how you justify this situation.

Mike said...

I believe both should be excommunicated, to be honest.